first, the 15th amendment gives the right to congress to determine what the law should be to enforce the protections. the reason it gives that right to congress is because the states and we know about this from the civil war and everything that followed with jim crow, and the supreme court and we all know about the dred scott case and the horrible history, those two entities got it wrong and they deprived citizens of their right, their equal right. so specifically and intentionally the amendments give the right to congress to act and what did congress do? they had hearings over a long period of time, ten months, 90 witnesses, 15,000 pages, so even after that decision congress felt that if the court looks at what we did, we meet any standard. and i think that's what will be born out in this case. >> if you could quickly, what do you say to those critics who charge the section 5 coverage area just is out of daity? >> i think they're making a mistake because they're focused on the original coverage idea which was based on turnout and reauthorization. congress looked at what was happenin